Nope. Accused, and not even prosecuted. Not even close to being guilty.
I think the Counselor has the advantage in popular vote, like 97%, but it won’t be settled until the vote from the Marketplace Forum is counted.
That’s concerning. It means that, effectively, the best way for any given individual to enact social change is to wait until their party of choice controls at least one of the senate or the white house, then start shooting justices.
And yeah, I don’t have a good solution, beyond “good bipartisan norms”. There’s certainly no law to stop this, and no matter how you would form that law, it’d create some pretty perverse incentives. But… damn. It’s pretty fucked.
And yeah, what iiandyiiii said. Sure, it might be legally legitimate, but do you honestly believe, even for a moment, that any republican would think for a moment that that was okay?
A lower-case republican, like you wrote it? Sure, some would, if it helped advance their power. An upper-case Republican? Mere atavistic tribalism now *dominates *what’s left of their ideology, not respect for democratic traditions or norms, so hell yes.
I was speaking hypothetically – if such a series of events were to occur (i.e. serial murder of SCOTUS justices), I think it’s reasonable to posit that more than just half the public would feel that a significant change to the process and policy was needed.
I beg to differ on the disclosure of classified information by your hero.
As far as Mueller having zero, those who have been indicted or pled guilty beg to differ. Mueller doesn’t run to twitter and share every thought, he is a grown-ass man who knows how to act like one.
I’m sure Republicans would go ape-shit over the idea of a Democratic president suddenly nominating a bunch of SCOTUS justices.
How many members of Trump’s inner circle has Muller indicted, prosecuted, or convicted?
Ape-shit is this new confrontational politics in public places being encouraged by some elected Democrats. It has to stop and should be repudiated by Democratic and Republican leaders alike.
Hopefully, that goes away, until then Ape-shit will be reserved when either Ginsburg or Breyercreate a vacancy with Trump on his second term with a Senate majority.
Republicans as far as I remember didn’t like Sotomayor’s past comment that a Latino woman makes a better decision than a white man. In all seriousness, if a Republican nominated justice said the reverse, people would jump on him or herfor making a racists statement! Why does Sotomayor get a pass? But there was a vetting process and a vote. You move on.
Like I said before, if someone investigated Obama or Clinton to the same degree, you’d get the same.
What does Muller have on Trump himself? Nothing, Nada, Zilch.
The media is whipping the left into a frenzy over this Russia business, but once the cards come down for us to see, it will be paned like a badly hyped movie.
Then expect a counter punch, and I told you so from the other side. The FBI has dirty hands, you’ll see.
You are really going to suggest Clinton hasn’t been investigated to this degree?
The President’s talk of punching protesters, and other instances of encouraging violence, are far, far worse than the nonviolent confrontation advocated by Waters. Of course, we have no illusions that you’ll ever actually criticize Trump for advocating violence, for bragging about sexual assault and the violation of women’s consent, for his routine lies, for pushing false and racist conspiracy theories, and much more.
You deliberately left out the most important part of that Wikipedia quote. :rolleyes:
“Permanent judges in the higher courts are appointed by the President… in consultation with the Judicial Service Commission as well as the leaders of the political parties represented in South African National Assembly.”
In practice this means that the Judicial Service Commission puts forward the name of a candidate, and (in theory) the President could refuse to endorse him. He doesn’t have any say in who is proposed.
Judicial Service Commission is divided roughly evenly between senior members of the legal profession and politicians. The politicians include a fixed number of representatives of opposition parties, meaning that no political partly - including the ruling party - can outvote the others. So no one group can force their own candidates through.
Seems like a good system to me.
Yeah, how come Clinton has never been investigated?
Encouraged like when Trump said “knock the crap out of them. I’ll pay your legal bills?”
The FBI has for many years been totally the bitch of the radical left. The cozy relationship between the FBI and the Black Panthers, for instance!
They didn’t like what they *claimed *she had said, no. But they didn’t quite get that right, now did they?
Here is a good overview on Bret Cavanaugh and how he was able to get his dream job.
Oops, sorry for the double post. I didn’t think the first one went through.
Unless you are actually on Mueller’s investigative team, you haven’t a bleedin’ clue as to what Mueller may or may not “have on Trump himself”. So kindly cut the crap.